Lawmakers consider chemical castration for pedophiles

reply to post by SyphonX

It's a stupid idea, and a sign of a very primitive culture. Pedophilia is a sickness of the mind. A stressed mind, most likely abused at an early age, and grew to be ill and in need of an intervention.

Yes it is a sickness, but I don't think stress has anything to do with it. Many of these people were abused as children themselves, I agree, but I am lost on what you mean by "It's a stupid idea."

They need to be kept out of society, and taken care of, tended to. It's a perversion of the mind, not the genitals. It's a sickness like many others, no matter how heinous. There are people more tolerant of this than people in this thread, and they work in the medical field and fully understand this.

I work in the medical field. I take shifts in the ER to keep my skills sharp. You are sadly mistaken of people in healthcare being "more tolerant" of this. Have you ever had to stand in a room with a child who has been raped...I have. I washed him off while he shook, vomited and just stared into blank space. This was of course after the investigations, pictures, kits and everything else that happens when these cases come in. You have no idea what you're talking about. As far as these people being "tended to"...I guess you've found your calling. You need to go get your certifications and get to work. While you're at it, you can foot the bill for them as well, because I sure don't want my tax dollars going to provide hot meals and a warm place to sleep for these monsters.

An individual who actually molests or rapes a child, is more than likely never walking public streets again, some exceptions have been made, but for the most part.. no parole board is going to free a child rapist.

These people are released every day. Concerned parents and others circulate petitions to keep them out of their neighborhoods and such only to be told these "people" have the right to live wherever they want. How nice indeed.

It's always "for the children", isn't it? Yet you people don't really care about the children, to be perfectly honest. You're not concerned with how the child is cared for in such an event, you only want to see blood and more pain, and death.

You just slipped the noose around your neck with this one. You talk about caring for child rapists and tending to them, then criticize others for not caring about the children. It appears to me, sir, you aren't concerned about the children at all, but the well being of those who have harmed them. Your statement here has left me utterly speechless. There's really nothing to say, as this statement speaks for itself.

There is such a thing as redemption, and true justice. It doesn't come from the end of a needle, from the further maiming of a human being, who probably suffered tremendous abuse to be so sick to begin with, and their death doesn't solve anything either.

How many times would the same person have to rape your son or daughter before you changed your mind on this? I'm just curious... How many times would you allow your child to be brutalized, raped, maimed, and physically injured before you stopped patting the rapist on the shoulder and saying, "It's ok. I understand. You can't help it. Someone was mean to you a long time ago."

The sick should be cared for, no matter what. Otherwise we have no right to be calling ourselves civilized. Does no one stop and wonder how certain individuals can become so degraded and ill, to bring themselves to hurting children like this? Do you think it stops when the state is authorized to maim people, along with executing them. Yet no concern is set side, about the particulars of said illness?

I agree, the sick should be cared for. I don't, however, understand how you link coddling individuals who cause further damage to society being civilized.

Perhaps we should bring back the public squares, with the flowing crowds, everyone with a stone in each hand, ready to dispense their version of justice. Certainly, everything goes away when you hurt it and kill it.. right?

Maybe we should. You'd probably see a drop in the rates of the events if these people knew there were serious consequences to their actions. As it stands today, they basically get away with it because there's some person or group picketing and crying about the human rights of the criminal...not the child or the family who has to clean up the mess and live in the aftermath. In my experience, the ones worried about the criminal are the people who don't actually do any of the work "tending to" the criminal, but the ones who are standing on the sidelines and not really doing anything one way or another. These people aren't sorry they did it. They are sorry they got caught. Then they get out of jail, with a slap on the wrist, move into a neighborhood, and start stalking again. It's a simple matter of rinse and repeat.

Every time I see something like this, it infuriates me. I could type on this all day, but I'm going to stop here. I'll just leave with the parting statement that, "I'll be that child rapist is glad you're out there watching his back, and making excuses for him, because without you, the rest of us would have our way and the problem would be solved."

Good day, sir.

Well, the so called "Fathers of Democracy" were also known as "boy lovers"
People dont realize how common sex with children used to be.
Evolving societies is what has made it wrong and for good reason but dont act like its a recent phenomenon.

I dislike pedeophiles, very much. chatting with friends, and online, wede talk about em, and ide always say to castrate them. but in talkking we all realized its still inhumane to do, and hey still have hands and fingers, that can do just as much damage violatiing someone. its not necessarily sexual..its also having, touching the kid too. its a stupid idea. and becuase its modern day lawmakers, supose it was here in america? that could or would open doors, for the powers to be, to have other crimes face the samee fate..rapsits, just as disgusting, or maybe being sentenced to 7 years and castration for robbing a bank, or steeling a snickers bar and caught.

reply to post by eletheia

There is no such thing as a "true" non offending pedophile.

Oh?

That's like saying there's no such thing as a "true" non-offending murderer. There are people I would kill, mercilessly, the moment I saw the rewards of being rid of that person outweigh the risks and fallout of such action. By my own reasoning - I have already acknowledged that the law is something I regard as a consequence to be weighed against action rather than a principle to adhere to.

I haven't killed anyone. Nor is it likely I will ever kill anyone (out of such wrathful feelings - IE, not self defense).

Pedophiles groom young and very young children with sweets and treets befriending

their families into trusting them as some sort of genial, generous "uncle" so as to get

access to abuse them through time.

This certainly depends upon the case. The vast majority of people sitting under child sex offender convictions were simply young adults who got involved with 15-17 year old teens and managed to piss off the wrong people. They don't creep around day-care facilities or try to hit on their coworkers children.

I'll go ahead and stick my arm into the fire, here.

A few years ago, when I was 18, I had come back from my active duty segment of training to begin my service in the reserves (should -never- have enlisted as a reservist... but, you live and learn). My mother hand just passed away from cancer (as in, the morning of the day I got back), and we dealt with that for a while.

I don't recall if the family in the rental home across the road was already moved in when I got there, or if they recently moved in. However - they had some younger kids about my brothers' ages (12 thru 6, about). Since we were out in a more rural area (not as rural as my younger days, but livestock was abound and it was a pretty good hike into town) - I spent a lot of time supervising them over the summer.

Among them was an 8 year old girl. To recap - I'm 18. It didn't take long before she couldn't be distinguished from my shadow, as they both seemed to follow me everywhere. Mind you - it wasn't in the creepy way. We talked a lot about different things - she was one sharp cookie. I often found myself in a weird position where I couldn't exactly place my feelings about her - on one hand, she was like a little sister I never had. On the other - my instincts to protect and care for her were similar to how I imagine I'd feel for a child of my own. And, I admit - she was a damned cute girl, and I admired how bright she was - just in general (she was more 'there' than many people my own age are, now).

Did I have a romantic interest in her? I wouldn't be too quick to say no. I recognized the age difference, and the life experience difference, etc. There was certainly a part of my mind that wondered if we'd be a part of each others' lives long enough to even consider the possibility.

And by all definition - I was a pedophile attracted to an under-age girl.

I never touched her in an inappropriate manner (unless piggy-back rides are inappropriate), and I always tried to make sure there was never the opportunity (for her or I) to get too curious.

How would you classify that?

And if a pedophile has not yet actually and physically

acted out on his impulses he will have in all probability viewed videos/films of actual abuse

being carried out and there is a victim at the end of every one of those video/films so that

would make him GUILTY by PROXY.

You are aware that a huge part of the pornography and 'adult industry' is supported by human trafficking and slavery, correct?

There are quite a few high school girls who would love the opportunity to get paid to do what they already do - whether cameras are involved or not.

At the same time, just about any ethnic-centered pornography is based around slavery. Usually girls from lower income families or run-aways who get picked up by this industry and provided a minimal and seemingly inescapable existence.

Why not just declare anyone who watches pornography guilty of participating in illegal human trafficking, drug use, sexual assault, etc by proxy, as well?

Pedophiles are MONSTERS but are very hard to recognise because they look just like your

father, son, brother, uncle, grandfather nephew, that 'nice man next door, even the priest.

You're obviously a pretty simple fella and seem to think pedophiles are all these devious little sociopaths.

While that is sometimes the case - it's generally the case with all sociopaths - be they murderers, fraud artists, etc. They are highly intelligent people who do not personally abide by laws or social norms, but recognize the importance of appearing normal.

But like I said - the majority of people who have been convicted of a child sex offense, that I am aware of, simply got caught up with a teenager as a young adult.

Now, I suppose you could make the argument that the term: "pedophile" refers to someone who is habitually attracted to children - IE, a girl at 12 years old will be seen as attractive while that same girl at 25 would not be seen as attractive. That is a little different - and a psychological condition.

Now, that characteristic, alone, doesn't make someone a sociopath about it.

reply to post by SyphonX



I finaly see some intelligent individuals on ATS, im glad , your post is extremly right

Thank you for your honesty, i share your opinion

To be fully honest

You all talk about how caring you are with kids, and how you would love killing, torturing,gassing, castrating paedophiles

And right after, you just claim being civilized...

I wish some random kids one day accuse you of being a paedo, i wish you all to be castrated, i sincerely wish it with all my heart.

I think a lot of molestation comes with drug use which seems to change the persons ideas of right and wrong totaly or make them lose their sense of morality. When they stop using they can stop abusing.

reply to post by Cricious




In this Country if there is ANY doubt a perpetrator dosen't get punished. When arrested

because of a complaint against them these people have their computers taken away and

examined. Put the complaint together with any evidence on the computer, you have a case

Years ago Garry Glitter (the pop star) took his pc into a well known store for repair, and

in the course of fixing it 'child porn' was found. The police were informed and a case was

built up where he was eventually convicted and went to prison. In this country (i cant

speak for anywhere else) juries can't find someone guilty if there is ANY doubt the offender

gets off and so NO ONE is punished on MERE SPECULATION

I run a search every six months for registered sex offenders in my zip code, though the check only pulls up level 3 sex offenders. I have kids at home and it is my responsibility as their parent to be aware. To know who my neighbors are, especially when I get a new person in my neighborhood, of which has just happened. I live in a rural area and so far, so good. But boy, when we go visit the in-laws in Florida, oh my....let me just tell ya...they they are everywhere. I run a check before we go down every year. I'll never move to Florida. What is it with Florida and the peds? I think the cold keeps 'em away or something. I don't know but parents, you have to be the adult and protect your kids. Simple.

reply to post by Chance321


never mind the neck down!.
the neck up more like!,these people/beasts think with their brains,the sick twisted add****s.

reply to post by Aim64C




You havent killed anyone because you know if you did you would have to pay the penalty

for it. (I see you are in the US and i understand your laws for murder differ from State to

State so i dont know what sentence you would get) here in the UK you would get life.

The instance of murder in the UK has gone up over the years since the death penalty was

dropped - so it would seem punishment DOES deter crime.


Pedophilia relates to prepubescent children (check the dictionary) under about 12yrs'

Child molestation and sex offences are committed against girls and boys who the LAW

states are under the age of consent.


Referring to your own actions it appears you conducted yourself in an appropriate manner

for a young adult. Behaving in a protective manner toward a CHILD. There is no doubt

children can be coquettish, but they are physically and mentally unaware of their behaviour -

so it is the responsibility of the ADULT to be protective toward them and preserve their

innocence.


You mention pornography and high school girls. Again that is under age girls/boys NOT

pedophilia. I believe the title of this thread refers to pedophiles (check it out !)

reply to post by eletheia

In this country (i cant

speak for anywhere else) juries can't find someone guilty if there is ANY doubt the offender

gets off and so NO ONE is punished on MERE SPECULATION

This is certainly not the case.

Know how we are trained in the military: "Perception is reality." It doesn't matter what really happens behind closed doors - if a woman brings you up on sexual assault charges - you're boned (no pun intended). Rape and assault cases typically go to the alleged victim by default. If you had the opportunity to assault/rape someone, and they say you did - then you did.

That's not the way our court system is supposed to work, but it's the way it does. As you can see, already, on this forum - people are immediately repulsed by the idea of a pedophile, rapist, etc - the number of people who can remain rational while viewing a legal proceeding involving these types of cases is very small.

That's our legal counseling in the military on the issue. Unless you can prove to the courts that you didn't (or couldn't), then you more than likely did. The only way to prevent that from happening is to not get yourself into situations where someone is going to have a suit filed against you.

Carve "Child Molester" on their foreheads, like the swastika on chistoph waltz character in Inglorious Basterds.

reply to post by Aim64C





With the law in the UK EVIDENCE is SUPREME and perception is NOT reality it is

not military law it is civil law.

You keep on citing rape and one person's word against another's but this thread is about

pedophelia and in cases involving minors medical EVIDENCE reigns supreme as proof

of interference and abuse. And again the law states where there is doubt there can be no

conviction.But then again that is here in the UK

Keeping on about women and sexual assualt etc. IS OFF TOPIC

if this is allowed to happen then how long do you think it will be before this punishment is expanded to any one how commits a sex crime then how long till its just hell why not just do it every one who is sent to prison to stop prison rapes

doing that to a human is a crime against humanity i'd rather be hung

edit to add i hate pedos as much as the next guy. send them to big prison theres no kids there

An alternative and slightly less ghoulish aproach might be to wire all released sex offenders for sound and video and have a central control centre where they are all monitored 24 hours a day. Maybe a little built in tazer as well just to be on the safe side ? Might seem extreme but if such a approach saved one child then i'd consider it to have been worth it.

Also beats my original idea for prefrontal lobotomies

Originally posted by ShAuNmAn-X
I believe that robbing a child of their innocence is a crime that is heinous enough to warrant the death penalty. The shear amount of psychological trauma that is caused by such an act can very well destroy someones life. Taxpayers shouldn't have to foot the bill for these pieces of human trash to be "treated" and chemically castrated. Crimes against children are the worst kind period. If one of these bastards touched my children they wouldn't live to be chemically castrated. I'm sure a lot of parents out there feel the same way that I do. Pedophiles are absolutely the worst of the worst. If Hell exists I'm sure there is a special place there for them.

Here's the problem with treating pedophiles differently than everyone else. You say that sexual abuse robs children of their innocence. True, very true. So, what do we do about violent, but non-sexual abusers of children?

Don't violent parents rob children of their innocence? Maybe we should cut off their hands so they can't beat their children anymore.

Pedophiles and abusive parents may be psychologically out of control, but there is NO excuse for drunk drivers. Alcoholics can drink all they want and then call a cab to get home. Those that get behind the wheel and risk killing people, and sometimes DO kill children, should have their feet cut off so they can't step on the gas. Why? Because nothing robs a child of innocence like death.

Drug dealers are the worst. They don't even see the damage they're doing to children. If we see a drug dealer selling dope to a minor, it should be perfectly fine to shoot them right in the effin head and just walk away.

What I'm saying is that if we stop being civilized to one group of dysfunctional people, it will do more harm than good to society. In a spiraling down effect, we will soon feel justified in the cruel treatment of other dysfunctional people. Before you know it, those caught driving five miles over the speed limit will be severely beaten. Homeless people are a blight on our beautiful cities; they should be taken out in the woods to be shot and buried.

Yes, put pedophiles in prison for life, along with drug dealers, violent parents, and drunk drivers, but doing physical harm to them would have the reverse effect of turning all of US into vicious animals.

Originally posted by BioStatistic
Yes it is a sickness, but I don't think stress has anything to do with it. Many of these people were abused as children themselves, I agree, but I am lost on what you mean by "It's a stupid idea."

By stress, I meant a tormented mind, not the general stress that everyone shares. Their stressed mind, along with their past experiences and so on. Then again, some offenders just groom themselves to be the monsters we talk about here. It's a horrible thing, and more needs to be done than punishment, in my opinion.

I work in the medical field. I take shifts in the ER to keep my skills sharp. You are sadly mistaken of people in healthcare being "more tolerant" of this. Have you ever had to stand in a room with a child who has been raped...I have. I washed him off while he shook, vomited and just stared into blank space. This was of course after the investigations, pictures, kits and everything else that happens when these cases come in. You have no idea what you're talking about. As far as these people being "tended to"...I guess you've found your calling. You need to go get your certifications and get to work. While you're at it, you can foot the bill for them as well, because I sure don't want my tax dollars going to provide hot meals and a warm place to sleep for these monsters.

When I get into discussions about the philosophy of justice, I tend to take in the bigger picture. Every day the noose gets tighter on society and freedom. We have secret torture prisons, legislation to allow the president to murder American citizens on a whim. We have the largest prison system in the entire world and incarcerate more citizens than any other country combined. Your view is more narrowed due to you having to fully experience the most brutal aspect of some crimes, as you work directly in the emergency room as you say.

When I say, they need to be "tended to", I didn't mean for that to be considered "treated warmly" and simply cared for with warm blankets and milk and cookies. They are criminals, and deviants. Tended to, as in cared for an institution, locked away and more or less studied, as callous as that may sound.

As far as not wanting your tax dollars going to these people, well I can fully understand that. However, the blame for that is shouldered on the for-profit US prison structure, which is overflowed with victimless crimes and useless misdemeanor-level drug charges. The system is flooded, so real crimes such as sexual offenses and murder can and do fall through the cracks, or rather they are stomped through the cracks with a boot.

These people are released every day. Concerned parents and others circulate petitions to keep them out of their neighborhoods and such only to be told these "people" have the right to live wherever they want. How nice indeed.

Again, you can blame this on the exorbitantly excessive prison system in America. Inmates go through their sentences untreated and sometimes just figuratively sit in a dark corner until their time is up. Some go in and come out worse off due to how ridiculous the system is. So you are right, some offenders do walk the streets again.

You just slipped the noose around your neck with this one. You talk about caring for child rapists and tending to them, then criticize others for not caring about the children. It appears to me, sir, you aren't concerned about the children at all, but the well being of those who have harmed them. Your statement here has left me utterly speechless. There's really nothing to say, as this statement speaks for itself.

I may have slipped the noose around my neck, but what I still stand by what I say. I was trying a more moderate approach in a thread that has been anything but. With gems like, "Crush their balls with a sledgehammer." etc, I was simply trying to point out the fact that brutal punishment does nothing. We are still one of the world leaders in documented executions, and clearly it does nothing to curb violence and murder. You cannot control desperation and those who are truly sick. They continue hurting themselves and others, because they are left untreated. The healthcare system in America is horrid, there is no sort of preventative care anywhere in America. People are left to slowly-boil until they become criminals or hurt themselves.

And truly, I do not "care" about rapists and those who molest children. I simply understand that harsher punishment does nothing to someone who is horribly sick. Nor does it stop others from committing the same crimes. It simply makes a disturbed and callous world, more disturbing and apathetic. More desperation will spawn from it.

I agree, the sick should be cared for. I don't, however, understand how you link coddling individuals who cause further damage to society being civilized.

It's not coddling, it's preventative medicine and true justice. No one cares for anybody until they boil-over and commit terrible acts. Nobody steps up, and there is nowhere for anyone to go to get treatment. Most people in America are probably not aware of the nearest mental-health facility, if one even exists around them.

As for the rest of your statement, it's more of the same discussion here. But perhaps you're right, maybe I don't care about the children or victims as much as I should, but I am not the one seeking heated vengeance. My response is leveled on being moderate, and understanding that we live in a desperate country where crooks and cronies are eroding our civil rights and justice system every day. It's not that we don't have enough punishment, it's that we have too much. We have no preventative measures at all, no avenues for treatment.

The vengeful punishment system in America is too excessive, and leads to people not getting the attention they need. People serving lengthy sentences for "marijuana charges" lead to too much wasted resources and manpower, which disallows treatment and attention to the people we talk about here.

reply to post by eletheia


You seem to be a bit confused. Understand that pedophiles and child molesters are two completely different things.

EDIT: And in case you didn't know (apparently you didn't), not all of them are males.

reply to post by eletheia

You havent killed anyone because you know if you did you would have to pay the penalty

for it. (I see you are in the US and i understand your laws for murder differ from State to

State so i dont know what sentence you would get) here in the UK you would get life.

The instance of murder in the UK has gone up over the years since the death penalty was

dropped - so it would seem punishment DOES deter crime.

This is not the case at all. I simply haven't come across a situation where I had the opportunity and the ability to remain anonymous as the killer. Nor have I deemed it worth my effort to actively create such a situation.

It's not that I'd have to "pay the price." It's that the number of people I'd have to kill to retain my freedom would grow exponentially if I just haul off and kill someone - witnesses, police serving warrants, etc. I'm a good-enough marksman that I could pin down the local law enforcement assets this regions has - but it's too great of an honor to the people I'd want to kill. They are not worth the lives of fellow uniformed service.

It's a completely different way of viewing the world - and a completely different system of logic from the average person. It arrives at many of the same conclusions, but is based on completely different values and principles.

Pedophilia relates to prepubescent children (check the dictionary) under about 12yrs'

Child molestation and sex offences are committed against girls and boys who the LAW

states are under the age of consent.

This is really a matter of technicality.

And, are you saying that if I were to start messing around with 13-year old girls, I'd suddenly be in a different category than if I were to mess around with 9-year old girls? And should be handled differently under the law?

Referring to your own actions it appears you conducted yourself in an appropriate manner

for a young adult. Behaving in a protective manner toward a CHILD. There is no doubt

children can be coquettish, but they are physically and mentally unaware of their behaviour -

so it is the responsibility of the ADULT to be protective toward them and preserve their

innocence.

While I would kind of agree... at the same time - "innocent" is not exactly the word I'd use to describe her. She was smart and aware - she knew she didn't want to have kids before she was able to support them. That said - she knew about the "birds and the bees" and was not afraid to be crass about things. I didn't recall my friends and classmates being that ... talkative at that age.

In short, I suppose, she wouldn't have been like: "let's play doctor!" - no, she would have been rather up-front about it.

Now, it could be argued that she knew a lot, without really understanding what it all really meant in the long run... but I never thought I'd see the day when an 8-year old girl and I were discussing why it's important to not have sex with just anyone. And she brought it up! It was like "okay... who took a 25 year old and stuck her in this child's body? And why is this even being brought up?"

I guess my point is - I feel your comments do me too much honor.

With the law in the UK EVIDENCE is SUPREME and perception is NOT reality it is

not military law it is civil law.

The chief interaction between civilian and military personnel is sex - strange as that may sound. While there are military-military relationships, it's often not in the form of permanent relationships or in the ranking members. Most of us date and marry civilians.

Because of this - when we get in trouble, it's most often for it to involve a woman, and be in a civilian court.

Sure - in an ideal court system, evidence does reign supreme.

However - stick a crying young woman or child in front of a jury, then stick the guy up on the stands and have him call her a liar (in more words or less) - and see how that turns out for him. The evidence doesn't really matter at that point.

You keep on citing rape and one person's word against another's but this thread is about

pedophelia and in cases involving minors medical EVIDENCE reigns supreme as proof

of interference and abuse. And again the law states where there is doubt there can be no

conviction.

Again, ideally, yes.

However - I'll prime you with a hypothetical example.

Let's journey to an alternate set of events - a friend and co-worker of mine hangs out with me quite often. She recently lost her father, and had her boyfriend break up with her (saying -he- was depressed, no good, etc) a few weeks after (a situation that eerily mirrors my own...). We've been hanging out for a few months on a rather regular basis - and feel some kind of connection. Let's say, one evening, we're hanging out here while my room-mates are at work. For whatever reason, we end up being intimate and have sex (that's where the alternate set of events comes in, mind you - she's still checking alphabet soup for signs the guy still has feelings for her... something I can understand... took me a long time). Things may seem okay - neither of us would probably be too happy about going that far all of a sudden - but we keep our distance. A few weeks later, she finds out she's pregnant and I find out I've got a rape charge filed against me (-highly- doubt she's the type of person to do this... but - people do some crazy things under stress, I found myself behaving in ways I was shocked and ashamed of after I lost my dad and girlfriend in the same month).

In an ideal court system - the evidence has to show that rape occurred.

The problem is, no one is going to sit up there and deny the two of us had sex. The question is, now, whether or not that sex took place with consent. With no witnesses, no legal documents, and (i should think) no video/audio recordings... kind of hard to rule one way or the other based on evidence.

What evidence is there? Obviously, the fetus. There's the fact our friendship hit a snag and there'd likely be a decline in texts and/or phone-calls. Employees at work might notice we're acting kind of weird around each other... we may have told a few of our friends what happened - I'm probably a little more talkative than she is, in that respect - if something is bothering me, I talk to people about it.

Unless she told a friend or two of hers what really happened (and they are brought forth to testify), it just turns into a case of her word against mine, where she's claiming I forced her to have sex (and, really, she's a small girl - even my feather-weight self would be able to) and impregnated her, while I'm sitting there saying she's lying and sounding like one of those guys who sits there and says: "she wanted it!"

What does the jury have to go on, other than circumstance and their own personal feeling? There simply is no evidence to prove or disprove consent.

Ideally, the case would be dismissed - maybe with me having to pay child support or cover abortion fees and the rape charge be dropped. In reality - it rarely works that way.

Keeping on about women and sexual assualt etc. IS OFF TOPIC

It's really quite on-topic. If I were to merely have "pet" my friend - the charge could have been sexual assault, rather than rape. Many cases of child molestation are, in fact, sexual assault against a minor, rather than all-out rape.

And, much of what I say has relevance. Do you not remember the big deal back in the late 80s and 90s was "hypnotic regression" - suddenly pedophiles and child molesters were everywhere you turned, because this process was able to uncover "suppressed" memories (memories we had forgotten because they were so traumatic). The ideal father suddenly became this deranged, perverted animal - the local youth counselor turned into a pimp.

May as well have been the Salem Witch Trials.